What are they?

The Expectancy Theories 

Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy is an individual's belief in their capacity to execute behaviors necessary to achieve specific performance goals. This theory differs from self-esteem, which is the sense of self-worth. An example of this theory in practice is an individual who believes they are not a good singer (low self-efficacy for singing). However, they still have high self-esteem since they do not really care about being a good singer. This theory is important because it influences everything from goals to actual learning. Those who believe they can succeed set higher goals, seek out learning opportunities, enjoy learning activities more, and generally achieve deeper levels of learning. On the other hand, those with low self-efficacy often set lower goals, avoid learning tasks, enjoy learning activities less, and achieve at lower levels.

https://sites.google.com/view/calvinproject/project-details?authuser=0

Attribution Theory

This theory is focused on our constant search for the causes of our successes and failures. Our perceptions of causality, rather than reality, are critical because they influence self-concept, expectations for future situations, feelings of potency, and subsequent motivation to put forth effort (Hunter and Barker, 1987). There are three continuums of casualty: locus, stability, and controllability:

• Locus: Feelings of shame, guilt, or self-esteem are based on one's perception of the location of the cause. This causality can be internal or external ("me" or "not me").

  • Internal ("me"): The idea that we are the originators of what happens rather than pawns controlled by outside forces. 

    • Ex. "I'm just not smart enough for math."

  • External ("not me"): When causation is beyond our control. 

    • Ex. "This teacher assigns impossible problems." 

• Stability: Expectations for the future are based on whether the cause is perceived as stable or subject to change. This is the only attribution that offers no possibility of change in the eyes of the perceiver, whether it is a native or a genetic ability.

  • Stable: "I just don't test well."

  • Unstable: "I wasn't feeling well when I took that test."

• Controllability: This attribution is related to an individual's feeling of potency to affect the outcome by controlling the cause. Of all the causal attributions, the only one completely under our control is effort: we can determine how much effort we will expend. 

  • Controllable:  "If I put in enough effort in this art assignment, I can succeed."

  • Uncontrollable: "There just wasn't enough time to finish this assignment."

View the chart below to see how these continuums of casualty complement each other.

Hunter, M., & Barker, G. (1987). “If at first . . . “: Attribution theory in the classroom. Educational Leadership, 45(2), 50-54.

Mindset Theory

Mindset theory is defined as the core assumptions about the malleability of personal qualities. It is also called "implicit theories," since it is rarely made explicit. They are also considered “theories” because, like scientific theories, they provide a framework for making predictions and interpreting the meaning of events in one’s world. Implicit theories are sometimes also called naïve or “lay” theories because, unlike scientific theories, they refer to a person’s common-sense explanations for everyday events. Students can vary in their implicit theories, from a more fixed mindset to a growth mindset.

• Fixed (entity) mindset: Ability and intelligence are largely innate. For example, we are born smart, talented, creative, or athletic.

  • Learned Helplessness: The learning or perception that one's behavior is independent of the presentation and/or withdrawal of aversive events.

• Growth (incremental) mindset: The ability and intelligence are primarily a result of practice and learning over time. Growth mindsets are far more productive. And it also happens to be a more scientifically accurate belief. Your mindset is determined by your attributions.

https://sites.google.com/view/calvinproject/project-details?authuser=0

Dweck, C. (1975). The role on expectations and attributions in the alleviation of learned helplessness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(4), 674-685.

Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47, 302-314.

How do these theories fit together?

All three theories fit together because they explain how a student’s beliefs about ability, the causes of success and failure, and potential for growth influence motivation, effort, and learning outcomes.